This raises an interesting point though...In florida there is a big issue about malpractice suits and personally i am for a cap on malpractice suits.....btu then you hear a f-up like this and you think...should this be capped at say 2 million?? or should this be worth 100 Million?? The psychological damage even at 67 has got to be huge...
yet another way to rail your average joe: Insurance, health care, medicare.... supposed to make medicin cheaper. Has it? Not from what I've see. On the contrary, the companies that provide these services are making a nice profits. Doctors on the other hand have been forced to lower their prices and do additional paperwork. So Doctors are in a pinch. Now, we can't allow the Doctors to take the brunt of this and we can't take away the profits from the health care companies. Well, why not cut Dr. costs? Hmmm... let's limit how much someone who has been injured by a Dr. not doing their job can get. Basic logic and human nature dictate that the result of this action will mean more malpractice. Why? Because it is cheaper. This is basic economics too, so let's come up with a formula: Scenario I: -Unlimited liability therefor high insurance costs (x1) -Need to lower insurance costs therefor (y1) amount of $ avoiding malpractice f(x1)=y1 Scenario II: -Limited liability therefor save (x2) in insurance costs f(x1-x2)=y2 Hypothesis: y1>y2 Basic Insurance Equation: rate of failure * cost of failure = no-insurance cost per operation insurance cost / number of operations = insurance cost per operation Insurance cost < No-Insurance Cost (Economic theory dictates that the left side of the equation be marginally less than the right or else there exists market inefficiency)